To begin with, it should be mentioned that the first modern labor organizations in the world were organized in European countries, mainly in Great Britain in the eighteenth century. Those organizations had a primary aim of providing help and support to the workers in the questions of social and cultural spheres connected with their work. It can be stated that these organizations were precursors of contemporary labor unions.
To get a better understanding of a problem under discussion, the definition of “labor unions” should be presented. According to B.K. Repa (2007): “Labor units are organizations that deal with employers on behalf of a group of employees” (p. 454). The appearance, successful existence, and functioning of labor unions are easy to explain. Let us imagine that one employee of a firm thinks that she deserves a pay rise, but her petition is rejected by the employer. She decides to stop working and she is surely fired and loses her job. The story could have had another finale if the woman were a member of a labor union. In that case, she would appeal to that labor union and there could even be a strike if her petition appeared to be weighty. It is always easy for an employer to fire a single worker, but they would seldom choose to fire the whole office (though history knows such cases).
It should be stated that in the USA “most highly unionized industries are mining, construction … manufacturing, printing, airlines, and public utilities. Among the least unionized are the professions such as medicine, law, banking… ” (Lanier, 2005, p. 78). At the same time, an interesting tendency may be observed nowadays: very often labor unions “organize white-collar workers when they arise. Doctors and other medical professionals are showing increasing interest in union protections due to threats on their incomes and autonomy…” (Asher, 2001, p.95). The consequences of successful strikes, like, for instance, the strike by engineers at Boeing were perfect proof for white-collar workers that unionization was beneficial (Asher, 2001, p.96). Sports strikes may also be very valuable because sports are considered to be a “catalyst for economic development” (Coates, 2001).
Some labor unions have such strong ambitions that they try to change the policy of governments, not local authorities: “Some unions were able to change government policy. Others tried and failed. The Argentine and Mexican teachers’ unions were the largest in their respective countries. Both of them were led by skilled and determined female leaders who had joined efforts in the organization of a Latin American association of teachers’ unions”. (Murillo, 2001, p.2) Their actions were aimed at the decentralization of the administration of education and it should be stated that they obtained a certain success.
Speaking about strikes, it should be mentioned that the desire to start a conflict is characteristic of human nature and aggression is also natural when an individual is not satisfied with the working conditions, payment, etc. Life is unjust, our society is full of deceit and fraud, and those who have lots of money often try to increase their capital at the expense of workers. Those actions often cause just aggression on the part of employees, but it is commonly known that the words “aggression” and “crowd” are synonyms to “anarchy”. Labor unions are those elements that control aggression, but they speak on behalf of employees and represent their interests, thus protecting working people and saving peace at the same time.
Still, no matter how organized and civilized a strike may be made due to the efforts of labor unions, it is always an unpleasant confrontation of interests. That is why labor unions usually try to take other measures when they are regulating the conflict between employees and employers and a strike is a final measure when all other attempts have failed. Instead of starting a strike, a labor union may file a grievance, when the reason for disagreement between an employer and employees is not serious and they will peacefully come to mutual consent. So, strikes should be regarded only as a final measure, because they may cause alienation and further conflicts between opposing parties and, moreover, union members are losing money during a strike because a person on a strike is not counted as employed. After all, he is not on the payroll (Rao, 2000).
Among other aspects connected with strikes, we should mention that a strike may inspire other workers from the same sphere or from other spheres to follow the example and satisfy their demands by means of strikes as well. On the one hand, the positive outcome for the workers is evident, they get a chance to improve their working conditions and social status, they get an opportunity to attract public interest to their problems, but the damage for the higher-ups is also evident. Still, due to a strike, an employer may be informed about the unrest and resentment on the part of his employees and settle the conflict. Besides, historians understand a strike as a cultural act, as a drama used by workers for conveying their messages to potential supporters (Opler, 2002). The most important thing is to control a strike, for in not to start anarchy among the public, because in that case awful losses may occur and the economy of the country may be paralyzed if the worst comes to the worst.
A very interesting example is presented by D. Craig (2005), who describes the strike of mill workers, who were inspired to act with the help of radio speeches and music. So, there may be different original ways how to inspire the employee to start a strike and to maintain their fighting spirit.
It should be mentioned that among the ways of dispute resolutions, there are three, which are considered to be the most important: negotiation, arbitration, and mediation.
Negotiation, if performed by the workers themselves, is not an effective form of dispute resolution, because the workers may have no sufficient skills of negotiating and may fail to prove the cogency of their claims to the employer and the employer has more chances to stick to his opinion and remain firm. So, in negotiation both parties are interested and emotions may also interfere with their decision.
Mediation demands the presence of the third “neutral” party, “purposively intervening in the affairs of others” (Roberts & Palmer, 2005, p.154). At the same time, they prove that “almost any third-party intermediary has some interest in a matter in which he or she intervenes” (Roberts & Palmer, 2005, p.154). Moreover, mediators can exceed his authority.
We consider binding arbitration to be the most effective form of dispute resolution because there “an outside neutral third-party issues a final decision on the grievance” (Bingham & Nabatchi, 2003, p.111). That means that the decision will be unbiased and just for both sides. Moreover, the third party is usually a judge or such-like qualified official, and this is the evidence of the legal process of conflict resolution. Arbitration can be advisory when the parties are free to reject the award and binding arbitration is the second variant of this procedure (Bingham & Nabatchi, 2003, p.112). Binding arbitration is considered to be more preferable today as it helps to manage a wide variety of conflicts.
To conclude, it must be said that conflict is a negative thing on the whole, but it is commonly known that arguments give birth to the truth. Strikes are worse than peaceful regulation of a conflict, but if there is no other way out, the strike is the only salvation for workers, and it can make their social status better.
Reference List
Asher, H.B. (2001). American Labor Unions in the Electoral Arena. Maryland:Rowman & Littlefield.
Bingham, L. B., & Nabatchi, T. (2003). 5 Dispute System Design in Organizations. In Handbook of Conflict Management, Pammer, W. J. & Killian, J. (Eds.) (pp. 105-127). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Coates, D., & Humphreys, B. R. (2001). The Economic Consequences of Professional Sports Strikes and Lockouts. Southern Economic Journal, 67(3), 737.
Craig, D. (2005). The Voice of Southern Labor: Radio, Music, and Textile Strikes, 1929-1934. Journal of Southern History, 71(4), 939.
Lanier, A.R. & Davis, J.C. (2005). Living in the U.S.A. Yarmouth:Intercaltural Press.
Murillo, M.V. (2001). Labor unions, partisan coalitions and market reforms in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Opler, D. (2002). Monkey Business in Union Square: A Cultural Analysis of the Klein’s-Ohrbach’s Strikes of 1934-5. Journal of Social History, 36(1), 149.
Rao, K. A. (2000). The Impact of Strikes on Current Employment Statistics. Monthly Labor Review, 123(8), 32.
Repa, B.K. (2007). Your Rights in the Workplace. Berkley: Nolo.
Roberts, S.A. & Palmer, M. (2005). Dispute processes: ADR and the primary forms of decision-making. NY: Cambridge University Press.